And this, for some reason, makes me want to add that Andrew Sullivan, who's only posted once today, says he's "absolutely fine," don't worry about him, "nothing has changed with this blog, no one is pressuring me to write or not write anything," and he's just taking some time off.

IN THE COMMENTS: Simon writes:

[Sullivan] is perhaps trying to get to grips with the reality that his weird idea about how picking Sarah Palin was a mistake has been rapidly and publicly falsified.

He was so deeply committed to this prediction and intent on making it come true that it must have been mortifying to realize that attacks like his on Sarah Palin were making her far more popular than she would be now if she'd been treated with ordinary, boring respect.

What accounts for that? Is it all about Sarah? Picking her was "strong and decisive." Or was it something more general about the 2 conventions.

I believe that McCain's Convention Speech - seen by even more people than Sarah Palin's - was far more effective than all of realize at first review.

2 points in that speech connected with every American that watched, except for the most cynical among us:

1) "and they broke me". My neighbor, a Democrat who has never voted Republican in his life, watched McCain's speech with me. He actually teared up at that part of the speech.

2) "and serve a cause greater than yourself". Very much like "Ask not what your country . . ." of John Kennedy's Inaugural. Every Presidential candidate mentions it. But and I'm deadly serious - everyone knows that John McCain has lived it.

This doesn't mean he will win, but again, only the most cynical won't be moved.

"There's only one man in this election who has really ever fought for you". ------ Sarah Palin

Obama's fundraising is faltering, perhaps only momentarily, but I couldn't help but go "Hmmmm..." after seeing this item on Yahoo News:

"WomenCount, a group co-founded by top Hillary fundraiser Susie Tompkins Buell, posted a lengthy item on their blog decrying questions over whether Palin can, as a mother of five, juggle her family responsibilities and still be vice president."

Buell is a major FOB/FOH donor with a powerful network of like minded Dems.

Listen!? Is that the sound of designer handbags snapping shut cross the Dem landscape?

I have always felt McCain picked Palin for one and a half reaasons: most important to shore up the conservatives evangelicals who were leery about him, and perhaps pick off a few disgruntled Hillary supporters. But it was always about the base.

Now while I do agree that polls are not particularly relevant, this one dissagregates the numbers and it is the movement of independents, among all segements, that makes this significant for me. The numbers arent but the fact that independents are breaking to McCain with 8 weeks to go must be creating havoc in the Obama camp. These are the swing voters that are what create winners.

This would be a good time to concede the argument that Obama's running for president lo these 18 months constitutes viable exectuive exerpience.

He can't solidify support from historical constituencies and he hasn't formed any new ones. The support he has, he cannot control even when it inflicts self-damage. His VP pick does not inspire confidence. He's failed to define his opponent, and his opponent has taken the lead.

1. In picking Palin, he reminded voters he's willing to be unconventional and decisive.

2. His speech, panned by most pudits (Jeff Tobin, Exhibit A), was actually very effective. It's calm and prosaic quality was a good contrast to Obama, and the detailed revelation of his pow experience, and its effect on his outlook, was unmatchably powerful.

At this I think the press strategy is super re keeping Palin on the stump--It is driving the liberals bonkers and they continue their attacks on her which are garnering her more sympathy. She is also stiffing the MSM which is an inherently good thing, and finally, she is going directly to the people and drawing large crowds. Lets see--how else used that stratergy to good effect?

Sullivan knows that we are watching someone(and the worthless polling data regarding this someone) who has not been subjected to any scrutiny by the coporate right-wing media. Thus far she has been given a free ride, simply because she has a birthing canal and a retarded baby. Too funny and tragic to even imagine.

Perhaps, with the recent unpleasantness in Georgia, people here are waking up to the fact that the next president won't be dealing with a lighthearted harmless shitheel like Boris Yeltsin over in Russia, but a hardfucker like Putin and his "mini-me", Medvedev. evevevev...ev. Or whatever his name is.

bjm said...Listen!? Is that the sound of designer handbags snapping shut cross the Dem landscape?

Honestly, if Hillary doesn't do all she can to torpedo Obama's presidency, I'll be disappointed in her. For all her talk about Obama being the one candidate that will move the country forward or whatever nonsense, her one abiding ambition is surely to be president. And she has to know her greatest chance would be 2012 - provided Obama's not in her way. She should try to help McCain/Palin win, and then go against Palin in 2012 when McCain announces he will not seek a second term. Wouldn't that be something to see?

Sullivan knows that we are watching someone(and the worthless polling data regarding this someone) who has not been subjected to any scrutiny by the coporate right-wing media. Thus far she has been given a free ride, simply because she has a birthing canal and a retarded baby. Too funny and tragic to even imagine.

Why should Sullivan make an ass of himself like you are Ms. Althouse.

2:40 PM"

At least in this instance, I'm with that Weasel-tear fellow in his discussion of what defines "Integrity".

Roger,Many independents were disappointed with McCain's cloying focus on the base and missed the "straight talkin' maverick". The campaign figured it out, repackaged the candidate and presto!

Of course, who the hell knows what kind of president he will be. Was the initial pandering a sign that he'll go all flaky-idealistic behind the wheel or will he stick to the hopes of independents for a small government pragmatist. It didn't take W long to get away from "compassionate conservatism".

Camapaign's be they political or military are all about morale. Him that has it wins, him that don't becomes worm food.

In a small unit action, you can hear it. the weapon noises are balanced, then something happens and all of a sudden you start hearing more M-16's and less AK's, then the noise tempo shifts further and the AK's drop off, and you start hearing yells in English as the good guys recognize that they are dominating the enemy. The battle is all over but the pursuit.

Unless McCain is destroyed in the debate or they find Palin guilty of taking kick-backs, the good guys have the momentum and it will be extremely difficult for Obama to recover any initative.

Compounding that, Obama now has a funding problem. He needs to raise 100 million a month and has many many fund raisers scheduled. McCain is completely free to campaign. Obama donors would give when Obama was sure to win, will they spend when obama is losing? who knows. McCain is getting 80 million regardless.

"compassionate conservatism" was always big-government conservatism, so anyone surprised by the Bush record on "holding the line on spending" needs to go back and read through the Weekly Standard and National Review archives of '99 and 2000; most of us saw this coming, not without some trepidation. Actually, I recall quite vividly the "shark attack" summer of 2001, where it was fast becoming obvious that Bush was headed to mediocre one-term status; of course, 9/11 changed all that, when Bush "found his voice" and a rationale for his presidency beyond benign administration of the levers of government.

I'm still chuckling at the idea of Sullivan being pastured by his bosses until the negative shitstorm passes over and he can come out and pretend the past several days of his diarrheic commentary didn't happen.

Doesn't it embarrass you that you have to be told what to think by a Huffington Post entry by a guy whose claim to fame is writing the script for "Anchorman"?

Follow what I write and you will know that I find the HuffPo columns inert and do not read them. I don't even know who you are talking about. Are you trying to say someone has to be told about a right-wing corporate media? You're either a moron, or don't pay attention to the world in which you live.

Don't know if I said it here but McCain should think about announcing he will only serve one term. And that his term will be a no-holds barred, hellzapopping, shit-kicking, corruption finding, lazy incumbent ejecting and beltway elite housecleaning term.

The movement of independents certainly is consistent with the size of the viewing audience for the republican convention. Another major tactical blunder by Obama: create interest and buzz about your down ticket candidate! Very smart. Also worth pointing out is that Obama's electoral experience is based on Chicago politics; using those as a template was probably not wise. Rather than touring Europe and winning the world vote, perhaps he should have been doing hall meetings in OH and PA

The Andrew Sullivan error hypothesis would require him to actually practice a conservatism of doubt. He is egotistical, arrogant and unwavering in his certitude -- the exact traits he decries in the politicians he despises. His blog is a fascinating exercise in projection.

Hey Sarge,what does McCain do with the 80 million he's raising since the convention? I thought that he's only allowed to spend the dough he gets from the FEC for the convention-to-election period?

It always sounded dumb to me, but I haven't ever looked to closely into it either. Can you provide a quick idea of how it works?

(yeah, I'm caught up in some work right now and can't spare the time to google/investigate this more exhaustively myself; if it's on top of your mind please comment; if not, please throw rotten vegetables in my direction!)

So, what is McCain really going to do as president. We've seen two very different views of him during the campaign. I think the more recent one is closer to his true style, but it makes me wonder how susceptible he is to pandering to the "base".

integrity said..."[W]e are watching someone ... who has not been subjected to any scrutiny by the coporate right-wing media. Thus far she has been given a free ride...."

Okay, now we know you're a parody. The media is "right-wing"? And regardless of the general biases of the media, Palin has "not been subjected to any scrutiny" by them, has been given a "free ride"? No one - not even Sullivan, not even Glen Greenwald - is dumb enough to try to sell this line.

"attacks like his on Sarah Palin were making her far more popular than she would be now if she'd been treated with ordinary, boring respect."

It's puzzling why Sullivan and the rest of the pro-Obama MSM chose the personal-destruction line of attack. Had they aimed their fire at certain of Palin's social-conservative views instead of at her children, they might have scored some preemptive hits. Instead, their tactics left a very nasty image of "journalists" so shrilly partisan they'd slime an infant with Downs Syndrome.

Seems to be the only country Russia's invaded in the past 8 years or so, though. Chechnya doesn't count, as it's been ongoing for over 10 years and has its own set of Russo-specific issues.

My point was that, while Putin's always been a hardass, overt aggressive militarism of the type displayed against Georgia is a very recent shift, unless I and the world media have missed something (I'm excluding the type of proxy/cloak & dagger stuff all great powers routinely pursue). All I was saying is that sending Russian troops across borders is a level of magnitude greater than temporarily turning off the faucets on a pipeline.

Voters can look at these events, listen to the candidates and draw their own conclusions.

It was quite a group that we had gathered. Every one of them was hopelessly in love with him. They all came in their spandex pants with the belly shirts tied at the waist. Listening to “Every Rose has it Thorn” on their ipods. They were all there. Chris Matthew, Keith Olberman, Andrea Mitchell, Andrew Sullivan, Josh Marshall. Men and woman. They all wanted to get with him so bad that they could taste it. Who would he pick? Which one of them would have a one and one with him? Who would he give a rose to and keep around another week? That is what makes it so great. The Barack of Love.(Michael Axelrod, E True Hollywood Story: The Barack of Love)

veni vidi vici said... Hey Sarge,what does McCain do with the 80 million he's raising since the convention? I thought that he's only allowed to spend the dough he gets from the FEC for the convention-to-election period?

The mcCain campaign is now limited to the 80 million of Ferderal funds.

However, McCain and others can raise money's for the RNC. The RNC spends those funds on GOTV and other more generic brand advertisements.

Obama needs to spearhead DNC fundraising and also raise funds for himself

Alex: hate to break this to you, but there's no there there. Fired a member of her personal staff for not letting her know that he was having an affair (with one of Palin's friends). If you are running as a reformer, then it undercuts your authority if you can be beaten up about the morality of your own office. That seems to me to be good judgment on Palin's part.

Alex said..."It seems that the Palin water carriers are starting to get very scared over 100s of brewing scandals."

I have one question: What brewing scandals? Everything that Palin's critics on the left and in the media have thrown at her -- everything -- has turned out to be gossamer. The closest that anyone has managed to come is to point out that the story about the bridge is perhaps more nuanced than Palin has implied in her speeches, but even that criticism flies wide over the stern given that the more complex version isn't in tension with what Palin said. The criticism boils down to the shocking, stunning suggestion that someone oversimplified a complex matter - in a speech! That's something that The One wouldn't do, of course. Never, ever. Not in a million years. Unless his lips were moving, that is, but that's the only exception.

Sooner or later - and personally I hope it's later - the left is going to realize how much harm they've done themselves in the last ten days. You remember the boy who cried wolf? You guys have cried wolf over and over again. In your desperation to find anything you can weaponize against Palin, you keep trumpeting and overselling petty, meaningless, vaporous, gossamer crap, claiming that it's a serious criticism. Sooner or later, the left may well find something that really does hit Palin squarely. By the time you find it, however, I think that the public will have grown tired of and insensitive to the sound of the left bleating about Palin, and having finally found the talking point they were looking for all along, the left will find it falls on deaf ears.

Simply put, the relentless stream of lies you're hurling at Palin now is building a presumption in the minds of ordinary Americans that you guys are full of it. And you may not be able to shake if you ever do get the goods on Sarah.

Sullivan knows that we are watching someone(and the worthless polling data regarding this someone) who has not been subjected to any scrutiny by the coporate right-wing media. Thus far she has been given a free ride, simply because she has a birthing canal and a retarded baby. Too funny and tragic to even imagine.

Why should Sullivan make an ass of himself like you are Ms. Althouse.

Hey moron,

What scrutiny has Obama had? What scrutiny did Clinton have? Both got free rides from the media. One because he is Black and the other simply because she is a birthing canal with a retarded husband.

As to Sullivan, he already made an ass of himself. I heard he will be the new mascot for the Democratic Party.

"So, what is McCain really going to do as president. We've seen two very different views of him during the campaign. I think the more recent one is closer to his true style, but it makes me wonder how susceptible he is to pandering to the "base"."

You know, I'm with you TM on being at something of a loss as to what McCain will do. Or Obama, for that matter.

Americans like tough-talking foreign policy against aggressive others. That's less a judgment than a statement of fact, methinks.

As for the next administration, there's going to be a lot of work to do in terms of shoring up the domestic financial system, and action will be restricted by the unpleasant facts that taxes can't rise too much because our corporate rate is already one of the highest in the world, and the post-Enron legal regime has made companies look more favorably abroad rather than listing here and subjecting themselves to the arguably draconian rules. Additionally, the majorities in the Congress will restrict movement on any agenda items at odds with their own.

So, mostly there will be little in terms of "broad strokes" that voters can expect their next president to achieve, barring a massive landslide of 1984 proportions.

On the other hand, I'm looking at the next president to see Iraq through and live up to the word we gave the people there in 2002/3, rather than prematurely abandon the effort because there's more political upside to redirecting resources to domestic spending programs. Given the evidence and rhetoric of the past 19+ months by the candidates and parties, I think it's not unreasonable to believe that McCain would be more likely to see our efforts to midwife a free Iraq through, because if nothing else, he's seen the cost of failure firsthand on the people we were trying to "save" and on domestic morale, and Obama's dismissiveness of our efforts and motivations in Iraq has always seemed troublingly reductive.

I don't expect them to administer the domestic economy all that different than one another, frankly, although I believe that Dem control of the executive and legislature will portend a tax-hiking and spending spree of the 1993 variety, whereas McCain will likely continue to fight needless spending (however ineffective he may be against strong opposing majorities in the legislative branch).

For me, the election of an executive in times like these is about foreign issues. I think McCain has a better understanding of the fact that those Arabs on whose land we have been fighting are people who've invested some expectations and hope in us, and who have seen us walk away before. Obama has not closed the deal on that point, and his abstract flippancy is not encouraging.

All told, though, I think people that think this thing's over with 8 weeks left are deluding themselves. There will probably be several more swings in either direction, each less dramatic than the one before, until the only poll that matters is conducted in November. And the closer the result, the less likely the next president will achieve anything momentous or substantially different than his opponent would have.

That said, the question is less what McCain would do as president than Obama, who's been moving conspicuously McCainwards in his positions on the major issues for the past several weeks. Hard to conclude there's a "steel-spine" there if he's so malleable on stands he claims are based on his vaunted "principled judgment".

I had to stop reading after Brent's reply, highlighting his two points about McCain.

I totally agree. And I'll go further.

People who had previously dismissed McCain as an aging hawk, who moreover could only talk about his war stories realised that hey, maybe, this guy resembles our greatest leaders of the past. People who made their mark serving their country first, suffered in its cause, and then went into politics. Washington, Jackson, Eisenhower and many others in between.

That's a good list to be part of. Community organisers? Not so much.

And I'll go even further -- they like that he showed some courage with his VP choice. Because let's be honest, it's a huge, huge gamble. It will be until the polls close at 7 PM on November 4th. We Republicans loved the Palin pick, but ultimately, it will be for the country to decide if he risked more than he gained.

However, for showing stick-to-edness confidence in his pick every moment since that Dayton roll-out, for finding that elusive political "soul mate", I think a lot of Americans liked what they saw in this John McCain guy.

integrity said..."[W]e are watching someone ... who has not been subjected to any scrutiny by the coporate right-wing media. Thus far she has been given a free ride...."

Okay, now we know you're a parody. The media is "right-wing"? And regardless of the general biases of the media, Palin has "not been subjected to any scrutiny" by them, has been given a "free ride"? No one - not even Sullivan, not even Glen Greenwald - is dumb enough to try to sell this line.

Hehehe. Everyone in the American political process is so doucherific, how can one not make fun of EVERYBODY??? The establishment on every side needs to be ridiculed hard and parodied often.

The stock market ridicule was aimed at establishment member Larry Kudlow on CNBC, who attempts to tie every stock market move to politics. Doucherific to the max. The right open their big fat traps more than the left(too afraid of their own shadow to open their big fat traps)-providing much more ammo.

Anti-establishment is the only way. Ridicule them all as much as possible. Thoughtful, serious people are the only exemptions. Neither side contains thoughtful, serious people. How the masses take these establishment people seriously I will never understand.

I can't imagine that anyone reading my ridicule of liberals could not see the many forms of humor(parody, satire, irony, sarcasm) my disdain takes. Nothing and nobody is off limits. Including the retarded baby, he'll never be able to read anyway.

I attribute most of it to the stark contrast in the tone & style of their acceptance speeches.

Obama's was much more an angry response to McCain - red meat for the left, but something that failed to connect with the middle - independents and undecideds. (I attribute that mostly to the Dems fighting the "last war" of not being Swiftboated again - so Obama went for showing how tough he could be.)

McCain's speech, OTOH, was "high road" mostly (even criticizing his own party for "losing its way" when it controlled Congress). His delivery, easily the weakest of the 4 candidates, actually enhanced the heartfelt message of his sacrifice, being broken, and now serving something greater than himself. And he left the red meat speeches for the right to the "undercard" (Palin, Guiliani, et al). That had to appeal more to the center - undecideds and independents.

What accounts for that? Is it all about Sarah? Picking her was "strong and decisive." Or was it something more general about the 2 conventions.

Factor in delaying the convention one day out of concern for hurricane victims.

McCain's family history of service to the country, including both father and grandfather.

How familiar to viewers was the full story of McCain's Viet Nam ordeal and his refusal to accept release? What was the emotional impact seeing a man permanently impaired by the ordeal, who nevertheless perseveres?

"Someone who will take the best available information and make sound decisions for the benefit of the nation. That leads to ideological inconsistency with both sides."

I suggest looking to voting records, willingness and demonstrated breaking-from party orthodoxy, if what you seek is pragmatic, "nation before partisanship" leadership. That one is a fairly clear win for McCain, by the numbers. Moreover, he bitched out his own party's legislative behavior during his nomination acceptance speech as new party leader, fer chrissakes! I'd call that a pretty encouraging indicator of the type of leadership that you (and me too) appear to be seeking.

Obama may yet surprise me with something that clears up lingering doubts, but time is growing short for him and the turn towards the (somewhat reeling) negative attack mode doesn't promote the belief that he has much more to say for himself. Hoping I'm wrong.

And yeah, where the hell is Joe "Waldo" Biden these days, anyway? I'm picturing him in that Jack Nicholson electroshock therapy room, getting his brain zapped so that he can control his mouth by the time his debate rolls around...

"Obama's was much more an angry response to McCain - red meat for the left, but something that failed to connect with the middle - independents and undecideds. (I attribute that mostly to the Dems fighting the "last war" of not being Swiftboated again - so Obama went for showing how tough he could be.)"

I read somewhere that team Obama saw that McCain bought ad time directly after Obama's speech, and anticipating a negative attack, Obama preemptively raged it up a bit. How much of a douchebag did/should he have felt like after seeing/hearing the congratulatory and very polite openhandedness of McCain's ad that day/night, which remarked on the achievement of being the first African-American nominee, etc. and left all the partisan rancor outside the door.

Talk about shooting yourself in the foot; the contrast between the "measure" of the two men was inescapable.

His delivery, easily the weakest of the 4 candidates, actually enhanced the heartfelt message of his sacrifice, being broken, and now serving something greater than himself

Splendid point.

Weren't those of us who listened to McCain expecting a worsely delivered speech, though? I was.

He doesn't glide along like Obama; McCain's speaking style is that of an old horse allowed to go to the pasture one more time, and sensing the freedom of yesteryear, but knowing he doesn't have much time to enjoy it, tries to wheedle every ounce of meaning from every word.

It can be fatiguing for his audience to hear it, but every time he does it, it reinforces itself in his audience's mind that this man has a message, and that message isn't glitz or glamour -- it's sacrifice and service.

That's what happened last Thursday.

My mother, who was listening with my father (both not McCain supporters) said that McCain's speech was inspiring.

Like Victor Davis Hanson, who wrote that the last minute of the speech was worth the full hour, she found herself cheering inspite of herself at the end. FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT!

I've been thinking the same exact thing to myself the last couple days, regarding the boy who cried wolf. Your comment is the first place that I've seen anyone else mention it.

The left and their Big Media friends have (unknowingly, I'm certain) innoculated those of us favorably inclined towards Palin, with regard to potential bad news to come. There's only so much false alarmism that human beings can assimilate before we simply tune out completely. I'm not saying that with any sense of pride, it's just the way we creatures happen to be made.

Obama does look weak and indecisive when he is off script. If you worship "The One", maybe you see it as thoughtful and reflective, after all you are the party whose patrons thrive on the complexity that is beyond a conservatives ability to comprehend.

In general for decades now conservatives have had to fight and think through their ideas in a way that liberals don't. Liberal talking points are the stuff of network news and college curricula. That's why IMO many "progressive" blogs are so extremely ad homonim in their attacks. The writers haven't had to hone their ideas against any real opposition in their world.

veni vidi vici - My point was that, while Putin's always been a hardass, overt aggressive militarism of the type displayed against Georgia is a very recent shift, unless I and the world media have missed something..

I don't see most Americans in the same hysterics the neocons are about a limited Russian border action in response to a Georgian attack launched in disregard of US advice to them not to start it.

Most Americans see an unstable, dangerous world, but with Russia way down the list of threats. The bear only bites when provoked. So they would like to inform the neocons that our joblist is quite full as is - we don't even have enough troops for Afghanistan, our Reservists obligation eligibility was 80% burned out by Dubya. we have run down and not replaced main military combat equipment - now having less bombers, fighter jets, tanks, Naval ships and subs than we did when Dubya took office.

And while China is killing us on trade, our ability to keep good paying jobs - and our financial system is melting down? With Venezuela and the NORKs also being large problems for us on top of the China challenge to our economic and military edge? On top of Mexico collapsing into a narcostate and spreading chaos into the US from the Border McCain and Obama deep down want open and unguarded? Lets just say the enthusiasm for conflict with Russia in matters outside our vital interests is pretty nill outside hardcore Rightwingers.

So no new splendid new Neocon adventures. No "On to Syria, on to Iran, Pakistan, Lebanon, Sudan, Congo!! No "attack Russia!!" over a shitty little country" rhetoric is especially welcome, right now.

The geopolitical realities of an unstable world do favor McCain. But McCain will have to be very careful not to give the impression he favors endless wars and endless bleeding and debt assumption of the American public - because we have a "moral obligation to bomb any government we disagree with, and liberate freedom-lovers, noble aspiring democratic forces everywhere."McCain turns the contest into his being the one best suited to seek and fight more wars? Then Obama wins. Better a naive young neophyte than an old warmonger.

McCain is ahead only when they see his martial experience as making them more secure..not as the guy seeking to endanger them by bombing Iran to help "his Special Friend", put our troops in African morasses to "save noble peoples", a new ruinuously expensive Cold War with Russia to "help his dear friend Saakashvili". No language about "we owe it to the Iraqis" or "we owe the wonderful Afghans" the lives of our American sons to make them "happier and freer".

No endless war.

Of course Obama was talking about invading Pakistan and triggering a major war that could cost us 50 times the casualties of Iraq - just to get 4 "high value fugitives" hooked up with their ACLU lawyers and into a US Court - but most people believe he was just naive, and not serious.

Integrity said...I can't imagine that anyone reading my ridicule of liberals could not see the many forms of humor(parody, satire, irony, sarcasm) my disdain takes. Nothing and nobody is off limits. Including the retarded baby, he'll never be able to read anyway.

I bet you are one of those liberal lunatics are are really angry because your mother did not abort you to show some kind of political solidarity.

I've been thinking the same exact thing to myself the last couple days, regarding the boy who cried wolf. Your comment is the first place that I've seen anyone else mention it.

It's hard not to think of this as each day brings a new "scandal" that doesn't pan out. It's too long to quote here, but here is a discussion (of mine) of Palin rumors and the effect of the sheer number of them.

Obama's selection of Joe Biden made him look weak. Had he picked Clinton and genuinely united his party, Palin would likely not be the GOP VP nominee today. I think that will come to be viewed as the defining moment of Obama's campaign should he lose (and nothing more out of the ordinary course of American political campaigns occurs).

Talk about shooting yourself in the foot; the contrast between the "measure" of the two men was inescapable.

The two men are all over the map on everything and have proven to be extremely uncool and lacking. To measure them as anything but balless worms doesn't seem valid.

Palin seems to have a consistent point of view, but does not have the spine to defend her P.O.V. face to face with an interviewer. What the hell is wrong with saying to a reporter-I do not believe in abortion in any case and if we lose the election because of it, then we lose? Why not defend speaking in tongues(practiced in her church) and let the cards fall where they may?

Why can't Obama say that he really believes the surge was subterfuge or whatever he thinks it was and not a success, and let the cards fall where they may.

Why can't McCain say that he really finds the christian right obnoxious but still will defend their right to believe whatever they want and is proud to share a ticket with them and let the cards fall where they may.

Biden has always been a gasbag, a semi-likeable gasbag(when not lifting from other people's speeches, why haven't we heard a word about his plagiarism since his selection?), but a gasbag nonetheless.

These are the douchebags being offered up, ridicule is the only response.

Victoria, I know you don't usually do email, but is there an address where I can reach you? If you don't want to give it out on open forum, my email address is on my profile if you could shoot me a message; I have something I want to run past you.

I'm sure this post will get lost in the maelstrom but, in addition to the interesting factor the two blank canvasses (Obama and Palin) upon which each side can paint their hopes and dreams, this election is utterly fascinating because McCain has refused to go by the script.

You were supposed to pick boring old Mitt Romney, old man! You were supposed to defend the Bush administration. The war was supposed to fail. The economy was supposed to completely tank. Then voters were supposed to choose Obama's changeyness.

This is what has Sullivan rattled. He had it all planned out in his head, and now it's all gone to pieces.

Yes, that list is linked indirectly from the blog post I linked. The amazing thing is that he says it grows by about seven rumors a day. Admittedly he is stretching on some of the rumors, but still the rate of growth is astonishing.

Also check out Fact Check for a more through debunking of some of the more common rumors.

I'm far from suggesting that Sarah Palin is the perfect candidate. I just wish people would focus on real issues and leave the one-line jabs of no substance to comedians. I'm sure Tina Fey will do a terrific parody of Palin on SNL. When Biden or Obama tries to mock her in the same way it is far less entertaining and certainly not presidential.

this election is utterly fascinating because McCain has refused to go by the script.

You were supposed to pick boring old Mitt Romney, old man! You were supposed to defend the Bush administration. The war was supposed to fail. The economy was supposed to completely tank. Then voters were supposed to choose Obama's changeyness.

This is what has Sullivan rattled. He had it all planned out in his head, and now it's all gone to pieces.

"Victoria, I know you don't usually do email, but is there an address where I can reach you? If you don't want to give it out on open forum, my email address is on my profile if you could shoot me a message; I have something I want to run past you."

Blimey mate, are you emailing photos of John Thomas again? I thought you promised the Queens council that you would cease and desist.

I have to say that I don't think there are a lot of dual posters here. Are we really just six people here, shuffling names? I like to think not. I like to think that Althouse is simply sucking more people into the vortex.

It is apparent that the old Democrat (Clintonistas) Party will not be riding to the rescue of the Children's Crusade. Will those neophytes who survive the November shipwreck on the way to the Holy Land be sold into slavery? Will they wither and die in I-don't-give-a-shit-land?

I want some answers from the corporate-tool, General Electric-fools at NBC. They are my favorites.

Rev -- I'm sure you will kill me with real numbers but that hasn't been my experience at all. In my experience, Republicans are the middle class and Democrats are the poor, the mega-rich, and the professor-types. Broadly speaking.

Yes, it is. The Kos Kidz call it the 'drip drip' of rumours. They think this will be their winning strategy to get her. Could be.

No worries Victoria. Running against Palin is exactly the wrong strategy for them to take but they can't help themselves. Like an alcoholic, they just can't back away from the bar. They won't realize it until they hit rock bottom.

In my experience, Republicans are the middle class and Democrats are the poor, the mega-rich, and the professor-types. Broadly speaking.

People with more than an undergraduate degree do tend to be Democrats, yes, but up to that point increased education correlates with increased likelihood of voting Republican. Income positively correlates all the way.

Speaking of strong people, how's it going for Nancy and Harry? I hear they are being maneuvered into a floor vote on drilling and killing when Congress returns. What a pair of maroons. Didn't she say not over her dead body in August? Maybe her meeting with the Bishop changed her mind.

Archbishop of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of San Francisco George Neiderauer- "Kiss the ring, bitch".

Speaker of the United States of America House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi- "Arf".

Sullivan is either quitting his blog or is on a popper bender with his husband. He's just posted the final line of Ludwig Wittgenstein's book as his quote of the day: "What we cannot speak of we must pass over in silence."

Republicans still claim the support of the upper-middle, but by dwindling margins. Democrats increased their share of the vote among those earning more than $100,000 by 9 percentage points between 1994 and 1998. Between 1998 and 2006, Democrats increased their share of this upper-middle-class vote by 3 more points.

Till now, conservative strength in the vast American middle more than compensated for any losses at the top and for the immigration-driven expansion of the bottom. Indeed, the Democratic tilt of the very richest Americans could be exploited as a powerful conservative recruiting tool. Resentment of “elites” is a major theme of conservative talk radio.

I really do think someone at The Atlantic told Sullivan to take a few days off. Just like MSNBC kept Crazy Keith in New York during the Repub convention to try to cool things off. I guess we will know for sure if Sullivan ever returns and if there is a new, chastened tone in what he writes.

Time was when before Sullivan took some time off blogging, he went blegging and did a monthlong fundraiser, begging readers to contribute to him to keep his blog alive. You know, it's so darn expensive to blog. But I guess with his present paying gig, he doesn't bleg any more.

There are lots and lots of educated, affluent northerners and Floridians (i.e. Democrats) who have flocked everywhere in NC in recent years. If Hillary had been on the ticket, they would have held tight.

Plus, that "my Muslim faith" flub was a horrible misstep, one that was not fully understood by NY-based media and journalists (i.e. Yankees). It was as deadly as Ford's line about Eastern Europe being free. If you are a Southerner--black or white--and were raised as a churchgoer, that is an unimaginable slip of the tongue.

It tells you how deep his Christian faith is.

It would be like John McCain saying "...as a Scotsman...." or "as your comrade."

Obama will not carry any Southern state. No way. No suh.

(Mind you, I'm not saying he is Muslim, but he did study the Qu'ran as a boy. It was in the NY Times. It must be true!)

I watched McCain's speech and thought he blew it. Not horribly but I just didn't think it connected. Now I realize I was wrong. McCain in the last two weeks has demonstrated four qualities we don't see much in American politics. He showed CLASS in congradulating Obama. He showed BALLS in picking Palin. And he showed HUMILITY & AUTHENTICITY during his acceptance speech. I thought this was gonna be a razor thin election but I'm sensing maybe now not so much.

"Dive in quality"= anti Palin comments....right, got it. Seven is the judge of quality comments here on Althouse, so watch out everyone.

It's very obvious what happened to Sully the drama queen. He took a lot of heat from the higher ups at Atlantic for his Palin posts. He went on and on, even after the freaks at Kos admitted they were wrong about the "Palin's not the mother" rumor, about releasing the DNA records of the baby.

He got reprimanded in some form, and then put up that weird post Sunday night about how he respected Palin for having the baby despite knowing it would have Down Syndrome. This was his mea culpa, I suppose.

And now he's taking time off to recover from being humiliated and realizing that, surprise surprise, just because you're a blogger and the internet might be "anything goes" for some...you still work for somebody else who has, you know, a business to run. As Livia Soprano might say to Andrew, "Poor you."

Bitter Lemon said... "How can he comment on someone who has not been interviewed?"

Oh, I'm sure he could find a few more unverified rumours on the internet scream about.

Has Joe Biden released his medical records yet? Weren't we supposed to be getting a daily reminder?

5:23 PM

If you were reading his blog prior to this, then you know he was not happy about commenting about things that did not come from Palin herself and was horrified that she has not been put on the record yet. He's waiting for the interview.

Very strange that they have not released Biden's records. My bet is that he either has or has had a venereal disease. A republican would be crucified for this.

"If you were reading his blog prior to this, then you know he was not happy about commenting about things that did not come from Palin herself and was horrified that she has not been put on the record yet. He's waiting for the interview."

Well, I read his blog nearly every day. Considering he wasn't happy about it, he certainly found plenty to say.

I'm not supporting the McCain/Palin ticket, but Andrew went of the deep end in the last week or so.

Now, Sullivan has posted a You Tube clip of Desperate Housewives. In the clip, the character Bree forces her son to apologize to the neighbors for stealing a lawn ornament. The neighbors don't care, but Bree demands that her son apologize, so he reluctantly does.

The son's name, by the way, is Andrew.

And Bree, by the way, was the character involved in some baby drama where she faked a pregnancy last season (I think...don't watch the show).

That's true, Palladian, but no one makes it through the works of German philosophers. Except Nietzsche. But all the clarity in prose made him go insane. Much like Andrew Sullivan. And the circle is complete.

Trooper, if Titus was awake he'd tell you Ptown is unhyphenated. That's what he told me, and I believe him.

FWIW, I believe Republicans, at heart, are people who believe it's OK to do well, and like to think they too may some day get rich. All they want is to believe in a level playing field. The rest of the party planks are bullshit.

Dems, at heart, want the Gov to give them something, and then complain it's not enough.

One great line in Gov. Palin's speech describes what is a growing realization among many of us:"In politics, there are some candidates who use change to promote their careers. And then there are those, like John McCain, who use their careers to promote change."The distinctions are getting clearer every day, this man is the real thing, and Sen. Obama is a conflicted character actor.

One thing concerns me now, however. Anyone see how the state of Washington got its Democratic governor last time? See much press on it? After months of recounting, they suddenly "found" a shoebox of votes, ha! For me it proves that the side that howled "foul!", and falsely claimed vote stealing in 2000 and 2004 were actually projecting their own willingness to go to any lengths to get in office.

I have a bad feeling there are some deep Dem meetings going on right now, identifying key precincts where the vote must and WILL be Obama's, no matter who actually votes. Ohio, Pennsylvania ... (what's going on at ACORN headquarters these days I wonder?)

Of course McCain is a stronger, more decisive leader. It is just politically induced insanity that anyone would think that Obama was.

McCain is an Annapolis graduate, rose up the ranks to Captain (O-6), was offered flag rank (retired instead to go into politics), and attended War College.

What does Obama have in his background that would have trained him to be a strong and decisive leader? Harvard Law? Working as an associate in a law firm? Law school does not stress or teach leadership. Rather, the practice of law is much more taught as a solitary endeavor. Contrast this with our service academies, where leadership is one of the primary things taught.

In this case, we have one candidate who has had some of the best leadership training that money can buy, augmented by decades of practice at the craft, and his opponent who has essentially zero training and minimal experience. And yet, a surprising number of Americans think that the later is the stronger, more decisive leader. Go figure.

And McDifferent's poll numbers go up a few more points as even morewhite women desert the messiah in droves. I know the messiah went toColumbia and Harvard Law, but I also know he's never released his SATand LSAT scores. Schtooooopid is is as schtooooopid does.

Extraordinarily interesting thread--Thanks to integrity for disclosing he is simply a bomb thrower, chain yanker and disrupter of the peace. That makes him a cynic, which, of course is a wounded idealist. helps me assess his or her posts more analytically.

Even the AP, terribly in the tank for obama is starting to point out that Obama spends a lot of time attacking Palin--yet another lousy dem strategy--it just victimizes her and suggests that Obama doesnt have a clue

Zachary--congratulations on your job; glad to see you have become a wage slave. : )

Nice to know that Obama thinks his stock will rise by attacking a woman at the bottom of the republican ticket--Feel like your stones are threated Barry? You are hitting all the right notes to appeal to Americans. Keep it up! Please keep it up! (your attacks, that is)

I can't imagine that anyone reading my ridicule of liberals could not see the many forms of humor(parody, satire, irony, sarcasm) my disdain takes. Nothing and nobody is off limits. Including the retarded baby, he'll never be able to read anyway.

Indeed? I have a Down's syndrome boy in the first grade. He does indeed read, probably better than you do.

there's a whiff of panic on the extreme lefty sites. Even those idiots realize that Obama is managing to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Wonderful cri d'coeur on Huffbot entitled, in appropriately leftard prose."we are going to lose this freaking thing"

The dems have used an egregious strategy at the wrong time--Americans are starting to pay attention and the indys are breaking to McCain big time--

And what the dems fail to understand is that MSM no longer controls the message. I love it when stars align

In a Washington Post–ABC News survey released Monday, McCain enjoyed a 20-percentage-point turnaround against Obama among white women, going from an eight-point deficit before the Republican National Convention to a 12-point advantage after it.

The women that pollsters are watching most closely this year are different in some ways from their "soccer mom" and "security mom" sisters of those earlier election cycles. For one thing, they are slightly older than soccer moms (in their 40s and 50s) and are juggling another set of problems — how to pay for college for their kids, how to take care of their elderly parents. They are also less upscale. Lacking college degrees, they are more likely to be feeling the brunt of an array of economic problems that now includes high energy prices, rising unemployment, soaring health-care costs and housing foreclosures.

Democratic pollster Celinda Lake calls them "Wal-Mart moms" and "Wal-Mart grandmas" and says they are not so much undecided as conflicted in making their choice this year. Geoff Garin, a Democratic pollster who served as chief strategist of Hillary Clinton's campaign in its final days, agrees. "Frankly, it's because they are conflicted on Obama," he says. "They'd like to vote for a Democrat, but they're not sure Obama is the one." The Democratic nominee has not yet made the sale with these female voters, in part because they have yet to be convinced he has the experience he needs, and also because they are more culturally conservative than he is.

I honestly believe that this election will be a major game change--it will define a new face for the republican party and marginalize the old democratic party. It will also marginalize the MSM. I am sensing a sea change in American politics and the republicans will be the beneficiary. They are putting up a chicago pol and washed up has been against republicans who have, despite all odds, have managed to field a team of mavericks. This is the American story, and the dems totally failed to understand this

Sully, meanwhile, is perhaps trying to get to grips with the reality that his weird idea about how picking Sarah Palin was a mistake has been rapidly and publicly falsified.

Sullivan may have realized there a reason why there are so many televangelist in this country. Despite the scandals over the years they continue to thrive. There are a lot evangelicals. Ask the current two term Bush. All this talk about Palin speaking in tongues may have the effect of Palin not having to advertise it.

It cant belive these people are so ignorant of their own country.

Actually, strike that. Obama has been campaigning to his base all over Europe.